[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: well-lit dimosaurs

To: "Ray Stanford" <dinotracker@earthlink.net>, "Dinosaur Mailing List" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: well-lit dimosaurs
From: Jeff Hecht <jhecht@world.std.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:05:10 -0500
In-reply-to: <003001c0a33a$9e90e320$54f31e26@f6rkn>
References: <003001c0a33a$9e90e320$54f31e26@f6rkn>
Reply-to: jhecht@world.std.com
Sender: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu

At 12:02 PM -0500 3/2/01, Ray Stanford wrote:

The article attributed to BBC News Online science editor Dr. David
Whitehouse seems to have a glaring oversight:

    It says, "Measurements have been made on 100-million-year-old rock
samples...Researchers say that besides possibly giving T. rex a better
display of the Northern and Southern Lights..."

    Did researchers really say that (about T. rex)? I didn't know T. rex was
that old!  :)

The rocks are between 113 and 118 million years old, and formed during the 37-million year period when the Earth's magnetic field evidently did not change direction, ending about 83 million years ago.

BBC can be sloppy, but at least they didn't say Fred Flintstone was watching. <g>.-- Jeff Hecht

References:
- well-lit dimosaurs
  - From: "Ray Stanford" <dinotracker@earthlink.net>

Prev by Date: RE: well-lit dimosaurs
Next by Date: RE: well-lit dinosaurs
Previous by thread: Re: Postosuchus urine (was RE: well-lit dimosaurs)
Next by thread: Re: well-lit dimosaurs
Indexes: